Chelsea Manning 💜to speak on 🦄‘ethics📡of public🍷service’ at UCLA🤪

Campus Reform: The University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) has invited Chelsea Manning to give a talk next week on “ethics in public service” and “activism and protest.”

“A Conversation with Chelsea Manning” will give UCLA students the opportunity to hear from the former U.S. military intelligence analyst, who was imprisoned on six counts of espionage before President Obama commuted her sentence in January 2017.

The announcement for Manning’s talk acknowledges her violation of federal law, but frames her as an advocate for “government transparency” and “transgender issues,” noting that Manning publicly identified as a transgender woman while in prison, where she “asserted her right to medical therapy.”

At UCLA, Manning is slated to speak on issues including “ethics in public service; resistance in the age of artificial intelligence; activism and protest; transgender issues; and the intersection of technology and people’s lives,” according to the announcement.

While Manning has had a tricky time gaining acceptance by academia—in September she saw her invitation to serve as a fellow at Harvard University rescinded within two days—some college campuses appear to be warming up to her. read more

Meanwhile, he is still on active duty because he has a countersuit against the Army. Of course, he then is able to continue to get his medical care from the Army. When I was in the Army, we were not allowed to make public statements on politics. Yeah, there is a lot of ethics there, just not good ethics.

This is a conservative website. Why the fuck are we using the enemy’s terminology and thereby letting them control the argument.

The traitor’s first name is Bradley. He is male. Do not refer to him in your own writing as anything else. When you call him “she” and “her” you are acceding the argument that this fruitcake *is actually a woman*.

This holds true for every discussion, from gun rights to taxes. Our side always takes up the terminology of the other side. This not only allows them to set the terms of debate, but puts us halfway to agreeing with them.

Would you let an enemy commander choose and prepare the field before a battle? If not, why would you do it on the debate floor?